AMIT KUMAR, PANCHKULA,PANCHKULA vs. JAO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1079/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 September 2026AY 2015-20163 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal concurred with the submissions of the assessee's AR. It was held that the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside. The appeal is restored back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith. The reasoning is based on the assessee's submission that statutory notices were missed due to inadvertence and technical oversight, which prevented proper presentation of the case. The Tribunal found merit in this submission and decided to allow the assessee an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). The issue of the addition of Rs. 127.50 Lacs under section 69 and the validity of the best judgment assessment were not decided on merits by the Tribunal, as the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Amit Kumar, is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC dated 30-06-2025. This order upheld an assessment framed by the AO on 31-12-2021 under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on a best judgment basis. The assessment resulted in an addition of Rs. 127.50 Lacs under section 69 of the Act. The assessee was non-compliant during the assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) had endorsed the AO's view without substantive findings. The assessee's appeal before the ITAT concerns Assessment Year 2015-16.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the lower authorities for fresh adjudication on merits, considering the assessee's submission that statutory notices were missed due to a change in tax consultant and technical oversight regarding e-mail alerts. Assessee's Contention: The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) argued that statutory notices issued electronically were inadvertently missed due to a change in tax consultant and technical oversight concerning e-mail alerts. This prevented the assessee from presenting its case effectively. Therefore, a prayer was made to remand the matter back to the lower authorities. Revenue's Contention: The Learned Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR) opposed the assessee's prayer for remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

PER RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, J.M: Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 30-06-2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of

2 1079/Chd/2025 the Act on 31-12-2021 making addition of Rs. 127.50 Lacs u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act,1961. The assessee remained non-compliant therein. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), without any substantive findings, endorsed the view of Ld. AO against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR stated that the statutory notices issued electronically on the portal were inadvertently missed due to a change in tax consultant and technical oversight regarding e-mail alerts and therefore, he could not present his case properly and effectively. Accordingly, a prayer has been made to remand back the matter back to lower authorities. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 4 After going through impugned order, we concur with the submissions of Ld. AR. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits in the light of

3 1079/Chd/2025 written submissions as made by the assessee before us.

The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case

forthwith.

5.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01.09.2026.

-Sd- -Sd- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ) (RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER rkk

आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��थ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयआिधकरण, च�ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड�फाईल/ Guard File

सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →